🚀 go-pugleaf

Peter van der Linden wrote:

> My personal belief is that C++ has peaked and will now go into a steady
> decline.   But lets see some metrics proposed for measuring this.
> Everyone's got an opinion ;-)

I suspect this is true. The whole java bandwagon seems to be prime
evidence for a whole host of disatisfied C++ programmers. Internally
at BBN, we've seen C++ backlash with programmers retreating back to
ANSI-C, believe it or not. This is not so much an object-oriented
issue as a code-reuse issue (clearly if you have something that would
benefit from inheritance, you need an OO language, but that's not 
the point). ANSI-C libraries are much easier to handle than C++ 
libraries, for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which is
the stupid-dumb-fuck-mistake of not having a name-mangling standard
for C++.

I suppose that some of C++'s problems might be assuaged by increased
prevalenc of templates, but there are still a lot of us who have been
(badly!) burned by the monolithic inheritence model approaches to
object orientation (you, know, where you have to derive from some common
type to use a specialized Dictionary or what-have-you).

Joe.